IRLF 


o 
o 


REPRINTED  FROM 
TEACHERS  COLLEGE  RECORD,  FOR  NOV.  1920 

FOR  THE 

AMERICAN  CLASSICAL  LEAGUE 


A  REASONABLE  PLEA  FOR  THE  CLASSICS* 

By  GONZALEZ  LODGE 

Professor  of  Latin  and  Greek,  Teachers  College,  Columbia  University 

It  is  always  a  pleasure  to  address  an  audience  of  teachers  for 
many  reasons  but  particularly,  from  my  point  of  view,  because 
our  very  profession  commits  us  to  an  attitude  of  unprejudiced 
fairness  in  regard  to  all  questions.  Those  to  whom  the  education 
of  the  young  is  entrusted  are  of  necessity  the  most  potent  influ- 
ences in  forming  their  minds  and  their  outlook  on  life.  And  in 
our  form  of  government  where  everything  must  be  settled  by 
discussion  and  persuasion,  our  principle  not  only  as  citizens  but 
as  individuals  must  be,  "Prove  all  things,  hold  fast  to  that  which 
is  good." 

No  one  should  minimize  the  importance  of  a  careful  weighing 
of  the  merits  of  every  part  of  the  curriculum  through  which  the 
children  of  the  nation  are  to  be  led.  But  of  much  greater  impor- 
tance is  it  that  we  should  have  as  true  a  conception  as  possible 
of  what  the  aim  of  our  general  educational  system  should  be. 
For  upon  this  aim  will  depend  the  curriculum  and  the  choice  and 
relative  value  of  different  subjects.  In  what  I  have  to  present 
to  you  I  shall  have  regard,  of  course,  to  the  high-school  curricu- 
lum, except  in  so  far  as  a  part  of  it  would  naturally  apply  to  that 
new  experiment  in  our  system,  the  so-called  junior  high  school. 

Only  a  comparatively  small  number  of  youth  will  go  to  college. 
To  the  vast  majority  the  high  school  represents  the  highest  reach 
of  their  education.  The  question  at  once  arises:  "What  should 
be  the  main  trend  of  the  high  school  training?"  Up  to  a  few 

*  An  address  delivered  at  a  meeting  of  the  Maryland  State  Teachers  Associa- 
tion, Ocean  City,  June  29,  1920.  i  1  <>  <  r\ 

,     rO'lO 


I    /.    '   k   PLEA   FOR   CLASSICS 

years  ago  there  was  substantial  unanimity  that  this  should  be 
what  is  usually  called  "cultural."  But  during  these  last  few 
years  there  has  been  a  strong  movement  in  favor  of  the  "voca- 
tional" high  school.  This  resulted  first  in  the  establishment  of 
commercial  high  schools;  later  the  technical  school  came  into 
being,  and  so  on.  The  line  of  cleavage  between  this  new  variety 
of  training  and  the  old  has  gradually  come  to  be  marked  by  the 
inclusion  or  exclusion  of  certain  subjects,  which  have  thus  come 
to  be  looked  upon  as  peculiar,  particularly  classics,  although 
very  recently  there  have  been  those  who  would  build  up  what 
they  call  a  cultural  curriculum  without  the  inclusion  of  the 
subjects  which  for  centuries  have  been  regarded  as  the  founda- 
tion of  all  culture. 

My  subject  this  evening,  then,  is  to  see  whether  there  is  any 
reasonable  basis  for  the  inclusion  of  classical  study  in  any  well- 
rounded  high  school  curriculum. 

It  is  generally  admitted  that  the  pre-collegiate  training  is  and 
should  be  essentially  developmental  in  its  character,  that  is,  it 
should  be  adapted  to  develop  as  far  as  possible  the  faculties  of 
the  child  so  as  to  enable  him  to  meet  intelligently  the  demands 
of  his  unfolding  life.  These  demands  will  be  manifold  and  vari- 
ous. Many  have  been  inclined  to  direct  their  attention  to  the 
material  demands  of  life,  especially  the  means  of  livelihood.  But 
the  biblical  precept,  "Man  shall  not  live  by  bread  alone,"  was 
never  more  true  than  it  is  to-day,  when  the  practical  ques- 
tions of  existence  are  depending  more  and  more  upon  the  solu- 
tion of  problems  which  pertain  almost  entirely  to  the  mind.  We 
all  live  in  a  social  and  political  organization,  and  our  real  prob- 
lems are  not  those  of  labor  and  the  procuring  of  bread  and 
butter,  but  those  of  social  and  political  relations,  the  solutions 
of  which  will  carry  with  them  the  solutions  of  the  material  ques- 
tions. Hence  the  education  of  the  masses,  if  it  is  to  be  the 
solvent  of  all  our  ills,  as  so  many  confidently  claim,  must  have 
its  chief  regard  to  the  things  of  the  mind,  to  habits  of  right  think- 
ing, of  right  acting,  in  a  word,  of  right  living.  If  this  is  true, 
and  I  believe  you  are  all  as  fully  convinced  of  it  as  I  am,  how 
far  are  the  classics  valuable  in  preparing  for  this  end? 

It  is  obvious  that  in  the  short  time  at  my  disposal,  I  cannot 
treat  this  subject  from  all  angles.  I  shall  therefore  only  draw 


A   PLEA   FOR 


CLASSICS  '  3 


your  attention  to  the  most  important  points  in  which  classical 
teaching  seems  to  me  to  be  valuable,  without  any  serious  attempt 
to  discuss  them.  Most  of  my  remarks  will  be  confined  to  Latin, 
for  obvious  reasons.  ^ 

Language  is  the  great  achievement  of  the  human  race.  It 
above  everything  else  marks  the  supremacy  of  man  over  the 
brute  creation.  It  is  the  most  potent  influence  in  our  lives  to- 
day as  it  has  always  been  in  the  past.  As  the  instrument  of 
communication  of  ideas,  it  is  fundamentally  essential  in  all 
human  relations. 

In  the  study  of  Latin  the  child  usually  makes  his  first  acquain- 
tance with  language  as  a  created  instrument.  Even  if  he  be- 
gins with  some  other  language,  Latin  usually  gives  him  his 
first  idea  of  the  possibilities  of  speech  and  his  first  opportunity 
to  get  the  full  benefit  of  linguistic  study. 

In  studying  Latin  one  of  the  first  demands  is  accuracy  of 
observation.  The  very  nature  of  an  inflected  language  involves 
the  closest  attention  to  the  variations  in  ending,  which  often 
affect  only  a  single  letter,  if  the  exact  meaning  is  to  be  dis- 
covered. Inaccurate  observation  means  failure.  The  condi- 
tions under  which  a  child  learns  his  mother  tongue  unfortunately 
afford  little  opportunity  for  this  kind  of  training.  The  early 
appeal  is  wholly  to  the  ear,  and  the  use  of  the  eye  only  comes  in 
at  a  later  stage  when  the  language  has  been  already  learned. 
In  learning  a  modern  European  language  appeal  is  indeed  made 
to  the  eye,  and  thus  some  opportunity  is  provided  for  attention 
to  form,  but  the  large  loss  of  their  ancient  inflections  brings 
these  languages  more  near  to  our  own  in  their  value  for  training 
the  observation.  In  Latin,  on  the  other  hand,  it  is  impossible 
to  make  any  progress  without  constant  practice  in  this  import- 
ant faculty,  and  a  large  amount  of  drill  has  to  do  with  this  alone. 

But  accuracy  of  observation  would  be  of  very  slight  value 
without  accuracy  of  interpretation,  which  also  involves  accur- 
acy of  record,  if  frequently  only  mental  record.  In  our  ordinary 
intercourse,  we  consistently  help  out  the  inadequacy  of  expres- 
sion in  every  possible  way,  before  resorting  to  the  question, 
"Do  you  mean?"  Cases  occur  every  day  where  one  who  has 
observed  an  action  most  intently  is  unable  to  report  accurately 
what  he  has  seen.  Manv  of  the  disr>utec  in  r 


I4k     •*•  '  A  PLEA  FOR  CLASSICS 

evidence  turn  upon  the  ability  of  a  witness  to  report  accurately 
what  he  thinks  he  knows.  It  is  also  a  matter  of  common  knowl- 
edge that  much  litigation,  especially  in  our  courts  of  appeal,  has 
to  do  with  the  interpretation  of  phrases  which,  if  properly  ex- 
pressed, would  have  needed  none.  In  the  study  of  Latin,  it  is 
of  small  moment  whether  the  student  observes  clearly,  com- 
pared with  whether  he  can  record  accurately  and  interpret 
correctly  what  he  observes. 

It  thus  appears  that  in  the  study  of  Latin,  in  addition  to 
the  strengthening  of  the  memory,1  a  child  has  had  developed 
his  faculties  of  accurate  observation,  of  accurate  record,  of  ac- 
curate interpretation.  Do  I  claim  these  advantages  as  the  ex- 
clusive effect  of  classical  training?  By  no  means.  For  all  of 
these  advantages  may  be  gained  from  other  studies,  even  from 
those  which  make  the  smallest  demands  upon  the  mind.  But  in 
the  case  of  most  if  not  all  other  studies,  especial  attention  must 
be  paid  to  these  results,  if  they  are  to  be  obtained,  while  in  the 
study  of  the  classics,  they  constitute  the  training  itself;  they 
are  inevitable  to  a  certain  degree,  even  if  they  are  not  in  the 
mind  of  the  teacher  in  the  classroom.  The  fact  that  each  pro- 
cess requires  active  mental  effort,  as  well  as  active  exertion  of 
the  will  in  the  case  of  the  vast  majority  of  pupils,  instead  of  the 
merely  passive  mental  attitude  which  appears  in  most  kinds  of 
reading,  for  example,  may  be  one  of  the  reasons  why  so  many 
children  find  Latin  distasteful,  not  to  say  difficult.  The  habit 
of  fixed  attention  as  Dean  Briggs,  of  Harvard,  termed  it,  and 
which  he  claimed  was  the  distinguishing  mark  of  classically 
trained  freshman  as  opposed  to  others,  is  not  a  habit  which 
pupils  acquire  willingly.  The  difference  may  be  likened  to  the 
difference  between  gaining  physical  strength  by  active  exercise 
of  one's  muscles,  and  by  massage.  Many  find  massage  much 
more  pleasant. 

The  development  of  the  habits  we  have  just  discussed  should 
begin  with  the  beginning  of  the  study  of  Latin.  But  it  is  with 

1  The  learning  of  the  forms  makes  a  powerful  demand  upon  the  memory.  I 
am  aware  that  it  has  been  the  fashion  to  decry  the  cultivation  of  the  memory, 
but  my  own  experience  has  taught  me  that  the  memory  can  be  strengthened 
by  practice,  and  there  is  universal  testimony  to  the  value  of  a  good  memory. 
The  learning  of  forms  gives  this  practice  in  a  way  different  from  learning 


A   PLEA  FOR   CLASSICS  5 

the  beginning  of  translation  that  perhaps  the  most  vital  advan- 
tage of  the  study  becomes  apparent.  You  have  all  heard  over 
and  over  again  of  the  advantages  of  translation,  and  I  imagine 
that  many  of  you  are  sceptical.  I  will  not  weary  you,  therefore, 
by  rehearsing  the  benefits  claimed  for  it.  The  essential  point 
is  that  the  pupil  in  his  first  attempt  to  translate  from  a  foreign 
language  into  the  vernacular,  begins  to  realize  the  difference 
between  an  idea  and  the  way  in  which  it  is  expressed,  begins  in 
a  word  to  use  language  consciously.  Perhaps  the  hardest  thing 
in  the  teaching  of  English  is  to  lead  pupils  to  express  themselves 
in  more  and  more  effective  and  elegant  fashion.  I  know  that 
many  have  been  found  to  hold  that,  given  an  idea,  the  expression 
will  come  of  itself,  but  we  all  know  that  the  manner  of  expres- 
sion of  the  street  differs  from  that  of  the  drawing  room,  and 
that  the  latter  is  more  nearly  our  ideal.  A  dirty  urchin  can 
make  his  wants  known  in  picturesque  language,  but  we  should 
hardly  desire  our  President  to  address  Congress  in  that  manner, 
nor  would  we  want  the  Bible  written  in  that  form.  In  fact  the 
whole  question  here  is  the  question  of  art  and  non-art.  And  this 
question  is  one  of  universal  application. 

You  are  all  familiar  with  the  great  improvement  in  the  tastes 
of  our  people  regarding  architecture  during  the  last  thirty  years. 
We  all  know  that  the  architecture  of  the  70*5  and  8o's  was  atro- 
cious; that  the  colonial  form  on  the  other  hand  was  good.  Yet 
we  threw  aside  the  colonial  architecture  for  the  atrocities  of  the 
latter  part  of  the  last  century.  What  was  the  reason  of  this? 
It  was  because  the  ignorant,  the  uneducated,  the  devoid  of 
natural  taste  had  control  of  building.  It  is  almost  inconceiv- 
able, but  there  have  been  stories,  and  true  stones  too,  of  people 
painting  old  mahogany  Chippendale  or  Sheraton  pieces  white, 
or  disposing  of  them  at  a  song  in  order  to  substitute  the  prod- 
ucts of  the  jigsaw,  upholstered  in  plush.  We  have  fortunately 
passed  through  that  stage  and  emerged  into  a  period  when  all 
our  educational  influences  are  directed  to  raise  the  standard  of 
taste  in  building. 

The  case  is  the  same  with  regard  to  painting  and  sculpture. 
There  are  continually  attempts  on  the  part  of  the  ignorant,  the 
debased,  the  neurotic  to  introduce  new  styles  in  the  fine  arts. 
And  it  is  true  that  our  country,  the  whole  land  over,  is  dotted 


6  A   PLEA  FOR  CLASSICS 

with  monstrosities  in  the  form  of  statues,  busts,  monuments  of 
all  kinds.  We  are  perpetually  apologizing  for  them,  and  on 
investigation  it  would  appear  that  the  jury  of  award  has  usually 
been  composed  of  untrained  persons.  But  we  are  now  coming 
to  the  trained  art  commissions,  who  take  control  of  such  things 
for  the  purpose  of  educating  the  public  to  an  appreciation  of 
what  is  good  and  what  is  bad  in  the  fine  arts ;  while  our  museums 
both  small  and  great  are  steadily  consigning  to  the  cellar  the 
poorer  paintings  and  statuary  that  have  been  donated  to  them 
and  exhibiting  for  the  enjoyment  and  education  of  the  people 
only  that  which  meets  the  approval  of  the  expert. 

Yet  people  could  and  did  live  in  comfort  in  the  inartistic 
house  and  with  inartistic  furniture,  and  the  country  got  along 
in  spite  of  the  hideous  things  masquerading  as  art  with  which 
it  was  disfigured.  But  we  do  not  admit  this  as  a  justifiable 
argument  for  reverting  to  that  period  or  practice. 

Now  an  idea  may  be  expressed  in  wood  or  in  stone,  or  in  oil, 
or  in  musical  notes,  or  in  words.  We  have  a  structure  in  every 
case.  And  as  in  the  case  of  all  other  structure  there  has  been 
steady  and  continuous  effort  to  evolve  a  standard  of  perfection, 
so  too  in  the  use  of  words  there  has  always  been  a  form  which 
has  been  regarded  as  good,  and  which  people  have  striven  to 
reach.  We  have  such  a  form  in  English  which  we  call  "good 
English."  It  is  best  exemplified  in  the  works  of  those  who  are 
designated  the  English  Classics,  and  form  the  basis  of  what  we 
call  "good  usage."  There  are  not  wanting,  of  course,  people 
who  maintain  that  the  English  of  the  newspaper  is  good  enough 
for  them,  just  as  one  of  the  most  popular  automobiles,  one  con- 
demned by  artists  as  showing  no  beauty  of  line  at  all,  is  per- 
fectly satisfactory  to  thousands  of  users;  but  the  mass  of  the 
good  teachers  of  English  hold  fast  to  standard,  just  as  there  is  a 
perpetual  striving  for  greater  beauty  in  new  designs  of  automo- 
biles. 

We  seem  to  have  gotten  a  long  distance  away  from  our  sub- 
ject, but  this  is  only  apparently  so,  for  I  am  making  a  plea  for 
the  support  of  all  teachers  of  English,  when  I  maintain  that 
translation  from  a  foreign  language  into  English  furnishes  the 
best  opportunity  for  training  the  pupil  in  what  constitutes 
"good  English."  To  most  pupils  the  mere  correction  of  their 


A   PLEA  FOR  CLASSICS  7 

use  of  the  vernacular  so  that  it  is  grammactically  sound  is  nearly 
all  that  English  teaching  means.  But  in  translation  the  most 
important  question  is  not,  "What  is  its  meaning?"  but  "How 
can  the  meaning  be  best  rendered  into  English?  "  I  freely  admit 
that  many  teachers  of  Latin  have  been  and  still  are  derelict  in 
allowing  all  too  much  the  hideous  "translation  English "  which 
should  shock  every  one.  But  that  should  not  obscure  the  value 
of  the  practice.  The  very  fact  that  such  English  is  quite  satis- 
factory to  the  pupil  should  rouse  us  to  appreciate  that  the^ 
development  of  the  "good"  in  the  use  of  English  is  the  most 
difficult  as  perhaps  the  most  important  problem  that  the  teacher 
of  English  has  to  face. 

The  question  might  be  asked:  "Granted  that  translation  is 
a  valuable  exercise,  would  not  the  study  of  a  modern  language,^ 
be  just  as  valuable  for  this  purpose  as  an  ancient?  "     This  brings 
me  to  a  matter  of  prime  importance. 

The  only  reading  material  available  for  the  Latin  classes  is 
that  of  the  highest  literary  value.  Latin  students  are  accus- 
tomed to  begin  their  serious  reading  with  Caesar's  Commentaries 
on  the  Gallic  War.  Many  teachers  have  complained  of  this 
necessity  and  lamented  that  the  ancients  should  not  have 
written  something  adapted  to  school  use.  It  is  well  known  that 
the  second  or  Caesar  year  is  the  most  difficult  in  the  whole  Latin 
course.  To  my  way  of  thinking  the  absence  of  any  reading 
matter  of  a  trivial  nature  is  a  distinct  advantage.  For  it  must 
be  emphasized  that  Caesar's  commentaries  are  not  trivial.  Leav- 
ing aside  for  the  moment  the  fact  that  he  is  narrating  the  events 
of  a  war  which  was  in  very  truth  a  turning  point  in  the  history 
of  civilization,  he  did  this  in  a  way  to  warrant  the  extravagant 
praise  of  Cicero,  one  of  the  greatest  critics  of  style  that  the  world 
has  seen.  In  fact,  the  Commentaries  on  the  Gallic  War  are  not 
only  history  but  an  artistic  literary  creation  of  the  first  rank; 
they  form  one  of  the  great  books  of  the  world's  progress.  The 
very  fact,  then,  that  the  early  reading  in  studying  a  modern  ' 
language  is  apt  to  be  trivial,  is  a  great  point  in  favor  of  Latin. 
These  ideas  of  Caesar  are  worth  while.  They  are  expressed  in 
an  artistic  fashion.  When  rendered,  therefore,  they  should  be 
rendered,  if  rendered  correctly,  into  artistic  English,  in  other 
words,  into  the  high  style.  This  does  not  mean  a  florid  or 


£  A   PLEA  FOR  CLASSICS 

ornate  style,  for  Caesar's  style  was  not  ornate,  any  more  than  a 
Doric  temple  is  ornate.  Simple,  strong,  pure  English  is  the 
medium  to  reproduce  the  simple  strong,  pure  Latin  in  which 
Caesar  wrote.  Teachers  know  that  a  simple,  strong,  pure  style 
is  the  most  difficult  to  master;  so  the  translation  of  Caesar  is  a 
task  worthy  of  the  best  efforts  of  both  teacher  and  pupil. 

This  matter  of  style  some  may  think  to  be  beyond  the  capac- 
ity of  the  young.  But  this  gives  the  young  too  little  credit. 
They  can  be  taught  what  is  good  in  music,  in  art,  in  architecture; 
they  respond  to  what  is  good  in  character,  in  action.  The  heroic 
is  the  ideal  of  human  nature.  The  young  respond  readily  to 
the  heroic.  Then  why  should  they  not  respond  to  style  when 
it  is  properly  put  before  them?  In  fact  many  pupils  will  tell 
you  that  they  like  Cicero  as  well  as  Caesar;  and  multitudes 
have  liked  Vergil.  What  they  have  liked  in  both  has  been,  not 
the  commonplace,  but  the  unusual,  the  great,  not  merely  in 
idea,  but  in  the  expression  of  it.  I  readily  admit  that  Cicero 
had  always  an  eye  to  his  audience,  that  he  prepared  his  speeches 
to  be  spoken.  But  as  I  have  heard  Cicero  presented  in  a  large 
number  of  class  rooms,  the  very  fact  that  he  makes  any  impres- 
sion at  all  is  the  best  of  proof  of  the  enormous  vitality  of  an  utter- 
ance which  swerved  Caesar  from  his  settled  political  policy,  and 
has  come  ringing  down  through  twenty  centuries  of  intervening 
years.  But  it  rarely  rings  in  the  modern  class  room. 

The  value  of  treating  Caesar  and  Cicero  as  literature  may  be 
questioned  by  some,  but  certainly  this  view  could  not  apply  to 
the  works  of  Vergil.  His  works  are  obviously  literature,  and 
he  is  universally  recognized  as  one  of  the  world's  greatest  authors. 
Why  is  it  a  pity  that  every  high  school  pupil  should  not  read 
Vergil?  Not  so  much  because  the  ^Eneid  was  the  greatest 
achievement  of  the  Roman  genius ;  not  so  much  because  he  was 
a  very  great  poet;  as  because  he  was  and  is  one  of  the  world's 
most  potent  influences.  All  English  literature  has  been  per- 
meated by  him.  His  characters  have  become  household  words. 
During  the  whole  of  the  Middle  Ages  he  was  the  most  impressive 
figure.  The  ^Eneid  has  had  more  influence  morally  than  any 
book  except  the  Bible.  Both  favorers  and  opponents  of  the 
early  Christian  church  quoted  Vergil.  He  was  quoted  as  an 
oracle  just  as  was  the  Bible.  He  was  allegorized  and  regarded 


A   PLEA  FOR   CLASSICS  9 

as  a  picture  of  the  whole  sum  of  human  progress  long  before 
John  Bunyan  made  allegory  a  household  experience.  The 
sixth  book  is  one  of  the  most  important  in  a  long  series  of  apo- 
calyptic books,  and  has  been  regarded  by  many  as  equal  to  the 
Book  of  Revelation  in  its  influence.  The  ^Eneid  is  also  the 
interpretation  of  the  Roman  ideal.  The  Hebrew  chant,  "He 
hath  put  down  the  mighty  from  their  seats  and  exalted  those 
of  low  degree,"  is  set  forth  as  the  divine  mission  of  Rome  upon 
the  earth,  as  the  basis  for  their  greater  mission  to  preserve  jus- 
tice and  equity  among  the  nations.  Incidentally  in  reading 
Vergil  many  pupils  get  their  first  realizing  sense  of  rhythm,  of 
poetic  imagery,  of  loftiness  of  expression,  of  the  essential  differ- 
ence between  poetry  and  prose,  of  the  place  of  poetry  in  life. 

All  that  I  have  said  of  these  three  great  authors  may  be 
summed  up  in  the  idea  that  the  pupil  in  studying  their  works 
should  gain  literary  taste  and  some  feeling  for  literary  standards. 

Another  side  of  Csesar  and  Cicero  must  not  be  left  out  of 
consideration,  the  political  side.  The  time  in  which  they  lived 
was  one  of  the  most  momentous  in  history.  The  Roman  re- 
public had  had  a  life  of  approximately  500  years,  a  long  term 
as  national  existences  go.  It  had  grown  from  the  first  tentative 
stumbling  steps  after  the  overthrow  of  the  kings,  through  the 
period  of  robust  youth,  of  vigorous  maturity,  and  was  now  show- 
ing all  the  signs  of  senility  and  approaching  dissolution.  It  had 
withstood  the  privations  of  poverty,  the  cruelties  and  over- 
whelming sufferings  of  war,  the  trials  and  tempests  of  continual 
internal  strife,  as  the  idea  of  democracy  gradually  grew  and 
moulded  the  institutions  of  government  —  to  yield  finally  to  the 
deceitfulness  of  riches,  the  corruption  of  luxury,  the  debasing 
influence  of  the  immigrant,  the  enervation  of  peace.  It  had 

n  order  to 


It  had  known  the  period  when  public  office  had  been  looked 
upon  as  a  responsibility  for  service  for  which  strict  account- 
ability must  be  exacted,  to  come  later  to  the  period  when  public 
leadership  was  regarded  as  a  private  opportunity.  The  old 
Romans  felt  that  they  must  live  for  their  country,  the  new 
Romans  were  convinced  that  they.  must  live  on  their  country. 
In  a  word,  the  greatest  experiment  in  democratic  government 
that  the  world  thus  far  had  seen  was  approaching  its  end.  The 


10  A   PLEA  FOR   CLASSICS 

republic  was  dying  in  order  that  out  of  its  corruption  should 
arise  another  period  of  tyranny,  and  the  cycle  of  progress  should 
begin  again,  which  should  lead  through  its  various  stages  to 
other  experiments  in  democratic  government. 

The  progress  of  our  own  governmental  experiment  can  be 
paralleled  in  minute  detail  in  that  of  the  Roman  republic. 
Every  problem  that  we  have  had  to  face  was  faced  by  the  Ro- 
mans. The  solution  that  was  reached  then  can  be  studied  in  its 
ultimate  effects,  and  can  thus  teach  its  lesson  to  us.  The  decay 
of  public  morality,  the  use  of  money  in  elections,  the  over  riding 
of  the  popular  will  by  legal  chicanery,  the  playing  off  of  one 
branch  of  the  government  against  another,  the  weakness  of 
popular  government  in  meeting  a  crisis,  the  assumption  of 
autocratic  power  by  the  leader  to  whom  the  state  was  entrusted 
in  moments  of  stress,  the  invisible  government  of  bossism,  the 
effects  of  overcrowding  in  cities  as  shown  in  the  decay  of  social 
morality,  the  effects  of  a  large  floating  and  venal  electorate,  the 
evils  of  huge  aggregations  of  people  far  from  the  food  supplies, 
the  surge  of  the  rural  population  to  the  cities,  and  the  conse- 
quent decay  of  agriculture  in  Italy,  and  manifold  other  evils 
with  which  we  have  to  contend  today,  were  experienced  over  a 
period  of  centuries  by  the  Romans.  We  clamor  nowadays  for 
a  course  in  citizenship  in  our  schools;  Rome  furnishes  all  the 
exhibits.  We  ask  for  instruction  in  government;  Rome  pro- 
vides all  the  problems.  We  would  try  to  guess  what  the  future 
has  in  store  for  a  democracy;  Rome  gives  us  the  clue.  We 
would  know  what  to  do  to  preserve  our  country,  as  well  as  what 
to  avoid  doing;  Rome  gives  us  our  answers.  We  would  train 
our  youth  to  guide  our  country  to  a  higher  career  in  the  develop- 
ment and  uplift  of  mankind;  Rome  tells  us  how  we  must  use 
the  experience  of  the  past  to  be  our  guide  for  the  future.  Now 
the  turning  point,  as  I  have  said,  in  Roman  history,  is  the  first 
century  before  Christ,  and  the  chief  figure,  both  sinister  and 
beneficent  is  Caesar.  A  course  in  Roman  history  is  not  neces- 
sary to  learn  what  I  have  enumerated;  the  period  covered  by 
high  school  Latin  is  all  that  is  necessary. 

We,  as  Americans,  should  have  a  particular  interest  in  Caesar 
for  another  reason,  namely,  his  conquest  of  Gaul,  because  that 
made  our  existence  in  its  present  form  possible.  But  for  Caesar's 


A   PLEA   FOR   CLASSICS  II 

conquest  of  Gaul,  we  might  have  been  as  backward  in  our  politi- 
cal development  as  the  countries  of  the  Central  Empires. 
Caesar's  invasion  of  Britain  was  the  beginning  of  civilization  for 
Britain,  and,  by  consequence,  for  ourselves;  and  the  fact  that 
the  Roman  influence  never  penetrated  far  into  Germany  may 
account  even  now  for  the  tremendous  difference  in  political 
ideals  that  we  experience  upon  crossing  the  Rhine.  Caesar's 
conquest  of  Gaul  gave  us  our  alphabet,  our  principles  of  law, 
our  principles  of  government,  our  literary  direction;  in  fact  it  j 
was  the  responsible  source  of  what  we  mean  by  "western  civili- 
zation." The  Germans  give  much  importance  to  Caesar  for 
being  the  first  to  give  accounts  of  the  German  tribes.  How 
much  more  highly  should  we  rate  him  when  he  is  the  real  source 
of  our  life  and  our  views  of  life?  Looked  at  in  this  way,  the 
war  for  the  conquest  of  Gaul  was  more  than  a  mere  war  of  con-  \  j 
quest;  it  was  the  birth  of  a  new  life. 

In  connection  with  Cicero,  but  more  definitely,  of  course,  in 
connection  with  Vergil,  comes  the  opportunity  to  become 
acquainted  with  the  artistic  work  of  the  classical  peoples.  Our 
editions  are  now  full  of  illustrations,  and  there  are  actually 
special  books  devoted  to  illustrating  the  school  classics.  It 
would  be  well,  to  be  sure,  if  every  child  could  have  a  course  in 
the  history  of  art,  but  since  this  is  not  possible,  what  better  can 
we  do  than  to  draw  attention  in  his  other  studies  to  the  achieve- 
ments of  the  greatest  artists  of  antiquity,  those  who  set  up  the 
standards  which  are  still  the  standards  unto  this  day.  Here 
Greece,  has,  of  course,  the  preeminence,  but  what  Greece  did 
Rome  appropriated  and  through  Rome  it  came  to  us.  Our 
Capitol  at  Washington  is  but  the  greatest  of  a  myriad  of  build- 
ings throughout  our  country,  which  show  the  dominance  of  the 
Greco-Roman  ideals  of  building.  All  training  in  sculpture,  too, 
goes  back  to  the  Greek  masterpieces.  No  museum  is  complete 
without  casts  of  what  remains,  and  the  aspiring  spirit  still  goes 
to  them  for  inspiration,  for  guidance,  and  for  models. 

I  come  now  to  a  point  that  has  been  much  discussed  in  recent 
years,  the  dependence  of  English  upon  Latin.  Latin  influence 
upon  English  began  with  the  invasions  of  Britain  by  Julius 
Caesar,  and  has  continued  up  to  the  present  day  with  increasing 
intensity.  There  have  been  in  brief  four  periods:  (i)  From 


12  A   PLEA  FOR  CLASSICS 

the  conquest  of  Britain  to  the  overthrow  of  the  Western  Empire, 
the  period  when  Britain  was  having  to  a  certain  degree  the  ex- 
perience of  Gaul  and  Spain.  Roman  influence  was  direct  and 
dominating  and  extended  in  language  as  far  as  the  Britons  could 
assimilate  Roman  ideas  and  habits.  The  new  words  came  with 
the  new  ideas.  (2)  The  Norman  conquest  when  the  English 
tongue  suffered  a  large  admixture  of  French  words,  which  were 
themselves  but  decayed  Latin.  (3)  The  literary  period,  when 
English  writers  from  Elizabeth  to  Anne  designedly  introduced 
an  immense  number  of  words  directly  from  the  Latin  for  the 
purpose  of  enriching  the  ordinary  speech.  (4)  The  modern  or 
scientific  period,  when  recourse  is  had  to  Greek  and  Latin  to  give 
a  name  to  every  novelty  that  appears.  The  result  of  this  con- 
tinual borrowing  is  that  the  language  that  masquerades  under 
the  name  English  is  almost  as  much  Latin  as  is  Italian  or  French, 
with  a  strong  flavoring  of  Greek.  Ignorance  is  prone  to  refer  to 
the  past  with  a  fine  air  of  condescension  for  the  vagaries  of  the 
present.  How  often  have  I  seen  and  heard  opponents  of  spell- 
ing reform  exclaim,  "The  spelling  of  Shakespeare  is  good  enough 
for  me,"  when  we  all  know  that  if  they  were  set  to  read  their 
Shakespeare  in  the  form  in  which  Shakespeare  spelled,  a  cry 
for  help  would  soon  pierce  our  ears.  So  too,  how  often  has  the 
expression  "good  old  Anglo-Saxon"  been  used  to  cast  oppro- 
brium upon  such  words  as  may  have  had  their  origin  in  Greek 
or  Latin !  Whereas  we  all  know  that  if  our  language  were  ruth- 
lessly pruned  to  the  Anglo-Saxon  elements,  we  should  be  able 
to  communicate  with  each  other  scarcely  so  well  as  the  animals 
in  the  Zoo.  Our  Anglo-Saxon  advocate  would  even  be  bereft 
of  a  mind  with  which  to  make  a  pretence  of  thinking,  though 
of  course,  not  of  a  mouth  with  which  to  go  on  eating  and  drink- 
ing. Seriously,  the  Anglo-Saxon  element  ceased  to  grow  in 
English  after  the  Roman  conquest,  and  hence  represents  the 
civilization  of  the  primitive  barbarian  who  opposed  to  Caesar's 
legions  his  scythe-armed  chariots;  in  brief,  the  civilization  of 
our  American  Indians  when  Columbus  landed.  Everything 
that  pertains  to  the  mental  and  spiritual  side  of  man  has  been 
borrowed,  and  much  that  pertains  to  the  physical.  Medicine, 
law  and  theology,  science  and  business  use  a  language  that  is 
Greek  and  Latin.  Men  fight  and  die  for  Greek  and  Latin 


A   PLEA  FOR  CLASSICS  13 

words.  Liberty,  the  word  that  has  turned  the  world  upside 
down  more  than  once  is  Latin,  while  its  antithesis,  Tyranny, 
for  which  men  have  also  fought  and  died,  is  Greek.  Even  the 
tyranny  of  the  labor  union  is  expressed  not  in  English,  but  in 
Greek  and  Latin.  (Can  that  be  one  of  the  reasons  why  the 
labor  unions  in/England  are  demanding  a  classical  education 
for  their  chiloyen?)  A  century  and  a  half  ago,  a  new  people 
issued  to  the  world  a  new  charter  of  Freedom,  a  declaration  of 
independence.  Our  Anglo-Saxon  friend,  if  living  then,  would 
have  been  fighting  for  the  following: 

When  in  the of s,  it  becomes for 

one  -  to the bands  which  have ed 

them  with  another  and  to  among  the 

earth  the and to  which  the 

and  of s  God them,  a 

the  s  of  mankind  that  they  should 

which  s  them  to  the  . 

Or  would  he  really  have  been  willing  to  fight  for  that?  and 
would  such  an  utterance  have  shaken  thrones? 

During  the  last  year  a  certain  branch  of  our  government  which 
we  will  call  "blank"  has  been  fighting  with  another  branch  of 
our  government  which  we  will  call  "blank, "  over  a  matter  which 
we  may  call  the  "blank  of  blanks."  This  is  soul-satisfying,  is 
it  not?  Why,  we  could  not  even  get  a  name  for  our  country 
except  from  the  Latin,  and  bad  Latin  at  that.  There  is  no  new 
disease  but  what  goes  to  the  classical  tongues  for  its  name;  there 
is  hardly  a  new  business  device  but  what  does  the  same  thing. 
The  newest  material  for  raincoats  is  actually  called  aquascutum 
(a  wrong  formation  by  the  way),  and  no  new  tooth-powder  is 
ready  for  the  market,  and  no  new  germ  is  ready  for  business 
without  a  classical  title. 

Since  this  is  true,  we  might  at  least  ask  that  the  borrowers 
borrow  their  borrowings  properly,  and  that  knowledge  yield 
not  to  ignorance  because  the  ignorant  are  content.  Two  recent 
examples  are  illuminating  on  this  point: 

Greek  has  a  termination  -istes,  Latinized  as  -ista  and  Angli- 
cized as  — ist.  It  is  attached  either  to  a  noun  or  to  an  adjec- 
tive. Attached  to  the  noun  it  means  the  practice  of  the  noun ; 
to  the  adjective,  it  means  the  being  of  the  adjective. 


14  A   PLEA  FOR  CLASSICS 

Before  and  during  the  war  we  heard  much  of  those  who  made 
a  fetich  of  peace.  There  was  need  of  a  designation,  and  of 
course  Latin  was  immediately  laid  under  contribution.  Take 
the  Latin  word  for  peace,  namely,  pax,  with  stem  pac,  and  add 
-4st,  and  lo!  the  thing  is  done,  "  pacist."  This  most  natural 
formation  seems  never  to  have  been  seriously  considered.  Then 
there  is  the  adjective,  "pacific,"  from  two  Latin  words,  meaning 
"peace-making";  adding  the  termination  -ist  we  get  "pacifi- 
cist." This  perfectly  good  word  had  some  vogue  at  the  begin- 
ning of  the  controversy  among  those  who  knew  the  right.  But 
some  one,  ignorant  of  course,  struck  out  the  shortened  form 
"pacifist,"  a  monstrosity,  without  any  meaning  at  all.  This 
hideous  barbarism,  perhaps  because  of  its  adaptability  to  cheap 
jokes,  was  taken  up  and  spread  by  the  newspapers,  who  seem, 
as  a  rule,  to  have  little  sense  of  responsibility  for  language,  and 
has  thus  become  rooted  in  English.  A  still  more  recent  example 
has  a  ludicrous  side.  Greek  has  a  termination  — ides,  meaning 
"descendant  of,"  Anglicized  as  -4d.  Latin  has  a  termination 
-cida,  meaning  "slayer,"  Anglicized  -tide.  Now  upon  the 
overthrow  of  the  German  imperial  government,  the  extreme 
wing  of  the  Socialists  took  part  in  revolutionary  movements 
under  the  name  of  "Spartacides,"  that  is  "descendants  of  Spar- 
tacus,"  a  Roman  gladiator  who  led  a  slave  rebellion  against 
Rome.  The  word  was  a  mongrel,  to  be  sure,  consisting  of  a 
Greek  termination  upon  a  Latin  name,  but  it  told  its  story. 
American  newspapers  had  a  hard  time  with  it.  So  long  as  they 
kept  to  the  plural,  they  had  no  difficulty,  but  when  they  had 
need  of  a  singular,  their  ignorance  had  full  swing.  Properly 
the  English  singular  would  have  been  "Spartacid,"  plural 
Spartacids."  But  taking  "Spartacides"  as  a  plural,  which  it 
was,  and  pronouncing  it  to  rhyme  with  hides,  what  more  natural 
than  to  make  a  singular  "  Spartacide, "  which  can  only  mean 
"slayer  of  Sparta,"  if  it  means  anything  at  all.  The  crafty 
soon  dropped  the  form  altogether,  and  had  recourse  to  "Spart- 
acan,"  a  correct  but  different  formation.  Will  any  one  have 
the  temerity  in  view  of  such  examples  to  claim  that  the  classical 
tongues  are  dead?  Would  it  not  be  far  better  to  teach  our 
people  to  use  them  correctly? 


A   PLEA   FOR   CLASSICS  15 

But  it  may  be  said,  "The  vast  mass  of  the  Latin  words  in 
English  have  become  so  much  a  part  of  the  English  language 
that  they  are  learned  as  English  words  just  like  other  English 
words."  This,  if  true,  which  for  the  sake  of  the  argument  I 
admit,  carries  with  it  the  question,  "Are  they  understood?" 
that  is,  "Is  their  full  meaning  appreciated?"  Now  I  have  had 
a  good  deal  of  experience  in  preparing  teachers  of  Latin,  and  this 
experience  has  often  amazed  me.  Young  men  and  women  of 
mature  mind,  even  those  who  intend  to  become  teachers  of 
Latin,  habitually  use  a  large  number  of  the  less  obvious  Greek 
and  Latin  English  words  either  in  a  wrong  sense  or  with  a  very 
hazy  idea  of  their  true  meaning.  Time  and  again  I  have  asked 
for  a  definition  of  an  English  word  whose  classical  origin  was 
evident,  to  find  that  the  would-be  teacher  had  a  ludicrously 
false  idea  of  it,  sometimes  actually  confusing  it  with  another 
word  which  had  some  little  resemblance  to  it.  I  remember, 
when  I  was  a  pupil  in  the  eighth  grade,  we  had  a  particularly 
hated  subject  called  "definitions."  We  were  set  to  learn  the 
definitions  of  a  certain  number  of  words  each  day.  I  also 
remember  that  in  the  examination  (in  which,  by  the  way,  I 
failed) ,  one  of  the  six  words  given  was  seance,  which  I  explained 
as  "a  short  nap  after  dinner."  Oh,  but  I  was  a  child!  Yes, 
but  a  colleague  of  mine,  many  years  later,  when  a  student 
asked  him  in  class  to  explain  more  fully  a  certain  matter  that 
had  come  up  said,  "We  have  no  time  now.  Let's  have  a  siesta 
about  it  after  luncheon."  An  extreme  case?  Perhaps.  But 
another  colleague  of  mine,  a  most  distinguished  man,  is  reported 
once  in  the  course  of  a  lecture  to  have  defined  feudalism  as  a 
"halo  around  the  feet  of  monarchy"  without  any  sense  of  in- 
congruity. No,  the  fact  is  that  a  large  number  of  people  have 
but  the  vaguest  conception  of  the  meanings  of  numerous  words 
they  see  in  print,  especially  if  the  subject  is  beyond  the  common- 
place, when  an  elementary  knowledge  of  Latin,  if  intelligent, 
would  make  the  sense  perfectly  clear.  I  think  that  all  would 
admit  that  sufficient  training  to  give  this  knowledge  would  be 
worth  while.  Of  course  we  could  not  expect  the  people  at  large, 
even  our  legislators,  to  be  as  well  trained  as  the  members  of 
the  British  Parliament  of  a  century  or  more  ago,  who,  if  the 
story  is  true,  while  listening  to  a  speech  by  a  certain  member  by 


1 6  A   PLEA  FOR  CLASSICS 

the  name  of  Dundas,  were  so  amazed  by  his  coinage  of  the  mon- 
grel word  "starvation,"  that  the  honorable  member  went  by 
the  sobriquet  "Starvation  Dundas"  ever  after.  But  we  could 
at  least  expect  that  such  monstrosities  as  "pacifist"  and  "Spar- 
tacide"  should  not  disgrace  us.  And  even  in  our  trade  names 
we  might  be  saved  such  malformations  as  "  aquascutum, " 
"sozodont,"  and  the  like. 

Since  Latin  is  the  origin  and  foundation  of  all  the  Romance 
languages,  it  is  evident  that  a  knowledge  of  Latin  renders  the 
acquisition  of  French,  Italian  or  Spanish  a  matter  of  little 
difficulty.  I  am  aware  that  sometimes  we  are  urged  to  begin  the 
linguistic  training  of  the  young  with  French  or  Spanish,  and  from 
these  to  pass  to  Latin.  But  the  fact  remains  that  the  acquisi- 
tion of  Latin  is  not  appreciably  accelerated  by  any  previous 
study  of  French,  for  example,  while  the  reverse  is  emphatically 
true.  A  pupil  with  two  years'  training  in  Latin  will  learn  as 
much  French  in  three  years  as  would  require  five  years  to  learn 
without  the  Latin.  And  the  Latin  equipment  is  just  as  effective 
for  Italian  or  Spanish.  From  the  easy  to  the  more  difficult  is 
a  good  pedagogical  principle;  but  in  this  matter  when  the  more 
difficult  carries  with  it  to  a  large  extent  the  less  difficult,  we  have 
much  the  same  situation  as  appears  in  the  old  story  of  the  two 
holes  in  the  door  of  the  chicken-coop.  In  this  country,  we  have 
thus  far  chosen  Latin  first,  as  a  rule,  and  in  the  interests  of 
economy  it  is  to  be  hoped  that  we  shall  continue  to  do  so. 

I  think  I  have  said  enough  to  explain  why  a  large  number  of 
people,  among  them  many  distinguished  men,  scholars  and  men 
of  affairs  have  regarded  the  classics  as  with  mathematics  and 
science  constituting  in  themselves  a  sufficient  education  for  a 
youth.  If  we  regard  high  school  training  as  being  essentially 
general  and  cultural  in  character,  then  sufficient  knowledge  to 
constitute  a  specialist  is  not  required  but  only  enough  to  give 
the  main  clues  to  the  subject.  Hence  the  student  of  the  classics 
becomes  familiar  with  the  general  characteristics  of  language, 
without  becoming  a  specialist  in  linguistics,  gains  an  insight' 
into  the  foundations  of  our  civilization  without  specializing  in 
history  or  institutions,  gets  some  idea  of  the  theory  of  politics 
without  becoming  a  specialist  in  political  economy,  sees  the 
effects  of  division  and  faction  in  the  social  organism  without 


A   PLEA  FOR   CLASSICS  17 

specializing  in  sociology,  learns  what  constitutes  good  taste  in 
literature  without  specializing  in  literary  composition,  comes  to 
an  appreciation  of  the  highest  in  art  without  becoming  an  artist, 
and  finally  obtains  a  better  understanding  of  his  own  tongue 
without  trying  to  become  an  expert  in  English  philology.  Verily 
this  is  a  formidable  array  of  incidentals.2  Can  any  other  sub- 
ject equal  this  showing  or  come  anywhere  near  it?  This  is  the 
subject  we  are  asked  to  turn  out  of  our  curriculum,  in  order  that 
every  subject  of  which  the  pupil  gets  incidentally  a  general 
knowledge  may  be  presented  in  such  a  way  that  the  advantages 
of  specialization  are  lost  and  all  its  disadvantages  have  their 
full  fruition. 

Perhaps  some  of  you  may  regard  these  claims  as  extravagant. 
But  I  assure  you  they  are  not  so  at  all.  The  history  of  English 
government  in  and  out  of  Parliament  for  the  last  four  hundred 
years  proves  that.  But  certainly  these  claims  are  not  justified 
by  achievement  in  the  United  States.  Well,  perhaps  not — and 
yet  a  very  good  case  can  be  made  out  from  the  works  of  the 
great  men  who  made  us  a  nation  and  managed  our  destinies  up 
to  the  Civil  War.  Are  we  so  proud  of  the  works  of  the  last 
fifty  years  that  we  would  scorn  that  which  preceded  it?  But 
they  are  certainly  not  borne  out  by  the  experience  of  the  present 
day.  This  I  freely  grant.  What  I  have  been  trying  to  show 
is  what  classical  training  gives  the  opportunity  for,  and  oppor- 
tunity as  we  all  know  is  too  often  not  embraced.  But  surely 
that  fact  should  not  militate  against  a  subject. 

There  has  been  a  great  deal  of  more  or  less  loose  controversy 
about  the  value  of  the  classical  teaching  as  measured  by  accom- 
plishment. A  practical  people  has  asked  for  practical  results, 
and  has  claimed  not  to  find  them  in  the  results  of  classical  train- 
ing. Particular  point  has  been  given  this  criticism  by  a  pam- 
phlet issued  a  few  years  ago  by  Dr  Abraham  Flexner,  of  the 
Rockefeller  Foundation,  in  which  he  cited  figures  from  the  results 
of  the  College  Entrance  Board  examinations  to  show  that  Latin 

2  It  cannot  be  too  strongly  emphasized  that  these  incidentals,  as  I  have 
called  them,  in  the  case  of  most  pupils  do  not  accrue  of  themselves.  The 
teacher  must  see  that  the  pupil's  attention  is  directed  to  them  and  must  in- 
sist upon  his  obtaining  them.  Only  the  master  mind  will  absorb  them 
automatically. 


1 8  A   PLEA  FOR   CLASSICS 

made  a  very  poor  showing  as  compared  with  other  subjects. 
These  figures  have  been  shown  to  be  untrue,  but  the  correction 
of  an  error  never  gains  the  circulation  that  the  error  itself  had 
and  perhaps  some  here  are  still  under  the  delusion  of  that  pam- 
phlet. The  actual  facts  are  that  in  the  results  of  the  College 
Entrance  Board  examinations  Latin  stands  third,  being  slightly 
outranked  by  Greek,  another  classical  tongue,  and  French,  a 
daughter  of  Latin,  and  being  far  ahead  of  science,  history,  and 
English.  An  explanation  of  this  has  been  sought  in  the  asser- 
tion that  the  classics  have  been  taught  for  so  long  that  the 
technique  of  teaching  them  has  been  more  highly  developed 
than  that  of  the  other  subjects.  This,  of  course,  is  not  true  as 
to  the  second  statement.  The  classics  have  been  taught  for  a 
long  time,  but  the  teaching  of  them  has  been  completely  changed 
during  the  last  fifty  years,  and  their  previous  long  vogue  has 
been  a  detriment  rather  than  an  advantage  in  the  difficult  task 
of  adapting  the  teaching  more  nearly  to  the  needs  and  views  of 
the  present  day.  Hence,  strictly  speaking,  practically  all  the 
subjects  of  the  curriculum  (even  mathematics,  I  am  told)  are 
about  on  the  same  footing  in  the  matter  of  technique  of  teach- 
ing, for  they  have  all  been  completely  reorganized  during  the 
last  half  century.  Nor  am  I  willing  to  admit  that  teachers  of 
the  classics  have  been  or  are  better  teachers  than  those  of  other 
subjects.  The  reason  lies  deeper. 

But  I  am  not  now  concerned  with  the  reason,  but  with  the 
fact.  All  teachers  know  that  the  results  of  their  teaching  are 
often  very  disheartening.  How  few  are  they  who  are  content. 
And  in  saying  that  the  results  of  the  teaching  of  Latin  are  better 
than  those  of  any  subject  save  Greek  and  French,  I  am  claiming 
no  superiority  for  these  results.  Good  as  they  may  be,  they 
often  leave  the  heart  of  the  subject,  as  I  have  expounded  it 
before,  unrealized. 

Nor  can  we  object  to  any  subject  that  it  does  not  function  to 
any  large  extent  in  the  after-life  of  the  child.  Is  there  any  sub- 
ject, even  English,  in  which  a  large  proportion  of  the  pupils  do 
not  manage  later  to  forget  almost  all  we  hoped  they  had  learned 
in  school?  No,  ifv^vve  were  to  be  judged  by  what  a  large  propor- 
tion of  children  get  out  of  'their  studies,  how  few  of  us  would 
look  forward  to  the  verdict  without  trepidation,  and  how  few 


A   PLEA  FOR  CLASSICS  I§ 

subjects  would  remain  in  the  curriculum  at  all!  The  real  point 
is  what  the  subject  offers,  not  what  the  pupil  gets.  In  high 
school,  as  afterwards  in  college,  a  sumptuous  repast  is  spread; 
what  the  guest  eats  will  depend  upon  his  appetite,  his  capacity 
and  his  will.  The  real  standard  of  measurement  is  what  the 
master  mind  gets,  for  in  the  last  analysis  the  progress  of  the 
master  mind  is  the  progress  of  the  race;  the  master  mind  sets 
the  pace,  the  mass  must  gradually  work  up  to  it.  A  subject 
that  does  not  offer  much  more  than  the  average  pupil  obtains 
can  never  serve  as  a  stimulus  to  the  unusual  one.  And  if  any 
of  the  subjects  in  our  curriculum  could  be  presented  in  such  a 
way  that  all  who  study  it  could  become  perfect  in  it,  it  would 
be  time  for  an  investigation  of  that  subject. 
s  I  have  tried  to  show  that,  judged  by  the  opportunities  they 
offer,  the  classics  stiii  retain  their  claim  to  consideration.  I 
make  no  claim  that  they  should  be  taught  to  the  exclusion  of  the 
other  tested  subjects,  but  I  certainly  do  urge  that  before  they  are 
discarded  in  favor  of  untested  subjects,  those  upon  whom  the 
responsibility  rests  should  be  sure  that  they  can  substitute 
something  which  will  prove  equally  valuable  and  equally  econ- 
omical, when  the  balance  is  struck  by  our  descendants  in  after- 
times.  To  destroy  is  easy;  to  rebuild  is  exceeding  difficult. 
Thus  far  no  such  substitute  has  been  found.  Perhaps  the  time 
may  come  when  it  will  be  found.  When  that  time  does  come 
classical  teachers  will  be  the  first  to  hail  the  new  light. 


